commissioners johnck? >> i move approval with the staff condition. >> thank you. >> on that motion then, commissioners to approve with conditions, commissioners johnck. >> yes. >> jones. >> yes. >> matsuda. >> yes. >> pearlman. >> yes. >> /wof /wof. >> yes. >> hasz? >> yes. >> that motion passes ewe unanimously six to zero. that places you on item seven to henry adams street, consideration to adopt resolution for designation. >> good afternoon, susan parks, department staff. the item before you is a recommendation to adopt a resolution recommending to the board of supervisors the article ten landmark designation of 2 henry adams street, historically known as the dunham and carrygan building. since the last hering the attorney's office has issued a draft designating ordinance, which was included in your packet. the ordinance require that the owners adhere to programs at a future day-to-day. copies of the draft signed program available for your review. the department will forward the recommendation to the

commissioner johnck. i appreciate the discussion on the issues here, but i do believe it meets the requirements for landmark status in a very big way and i support the staff recommendation to designate the landmark and i will make two amendments to advise me on where to make these amendments, but i'd like to like numeral six to delete the word appears and put the word meets. >> motion? >> seconded. >> thank you. >> commissioners on that motion to adopt recommendation of approval as amended to remove in item six, appears to, and change the word meet to meets. and adding publicly accessible interpretive display to the project. >> just to clarify to make sure the recommendation is clear for the board of supervisors, i would recommend that the commission -- recommend the ordinance be amended to require a publicly accessible display as part of the landmark designation, that way the city attorney can put that language directly into the ordinance to enforce it. >> fine, agreed. >> is that acceptable to seconder?

commissioner johnck. i appreciate the discussion on the issues here, but i do

commissioner johnck. >> two things, you know, given the grand importance of what we're doing here, i was looking for some discussion of a public interpretation exhibit. i realize you're doing signage for tenant information and that kind of thing, but is there any plan for public interpretation plaque, exhibit or something. that's number one. and second thing, why you always say in the motion, number six, where as the historic preservation commission 2 henry adams /straoets appears to meet the eligible requirements? why not meets the eligibility requirements. it's my opinion they do, and i'm making the motion along with you. >> we can change that. to my knowledge /thr-sz no intent to create an interprettive exhibit at this time. >> i'd love to see something. >> yeah. >> if other commissioners agree. >> i would endorse that we make sure that every building has some kind of identification as to why it's a land mark. mark. that'd be great as a condition. >> thank you. >> i thank you very much for the backgrou

commissioner haws, commission wolfram, johnck, pearlman. first on your agenda is general public comment. at this time members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission with the exception of agenda i at